2008
DOI: 10.1007/s11306-008-0126-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Discriminant Q2 (DQ2) for improved discrimination in PLSDA models

Abstract: In this paper we introduce discriminant Q 2 (DQ 2 ) as an improvement for the Q 2 value used in the validation of PLSDA models. DQ 2 does not penalize class predictions beyond the class label value. With rigorous Monte Carlo simulations we show that when DQ 2 is used, a smaller effect can be found statistically significant than when the standard Q 2 is used.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
64
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 77 publications
(68 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
1
64
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The statistical signifi cance of the classifi cation PLSDA models was assessed using permutation testing with 1,000 permutations ( 37 ). Q 2 was used as quality-of-fi t criterion for the permutation test ( 38 ). Further details are given in supplementary Methods.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The statistical signifi cance of the classifi cation PLSDA models was assessed using permutation testing with 1,000 permutations ( 37 ). Q 2 was used as quality-of-fi t criterion for the permutation test ( 38 ). Further details are given in supplementary Methods.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…47 The predictability was measured using Q2, which is defined as 1 minus the ratio of the prediction error sum of squares (PRESS) to the (mean corrected) total sum of squares (TSS) of the response Y. [47][48][49][50] Values of R2Y and Q2 close to 1.0 indicate a better model. 50,51 We validated the PLS-DA model through permutation analysis (800 times) to reduce possible false-positive findings using SIMCA-P 11.5 (Umetrics AB, UMEA).…”
Section: Data Preprocessing and Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Whereas univariate approaches neglect covariance effects and suffer from multiple testing issues, the multivariate approaches are fraught by the risk of overfitting (95). Hence, rigorous crossvalidation approaches have been proposed (96). Multilevel approaches have been shown to be capable of distinguishing subtle polyphenol-induced effects in the presence of large phenotypic variation between subjects (31, 97).…”
Section: Metabolomicsmentioning
confidence: 99%